DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alionte et al (20060175877). The reference to Alionte et al teaches structure substantially as claimed including a cushion assembly comprising: a cushion (130) comprising a mesh member (140), the mesh member comprising a set of filaments of polymeric material, wherein at least two members of the set of filaments are looped and bonded to each other; a fluid impermeable layer (pgs 0072, 0073) attached to the cushion, the fluid impermeable layer comprising an inlet and an outlet; and a fluid actuator (150) attached to the inlet or the outlet, the cushion is fluid permeable, the fluid actuator is attached to the inlet (at least fig 2)to intake fluid into the cushion, the cushion comprises an occupant support surface and a base surface; and wherein the fluid impermeable layer further comprises an occupant support layer and a base layer (at least fig 2), the fluid actuator is attached to the outlet to exhaust fluid from the cushion, a heat transfer device (300). The provision of a plurality of intake/outake and positioning thereof is a matter of desirability and design parameters and how much volume of fluid/airflow is desired which would have been obvious and well within the level of ordinary skill in the art and a reasonably predictable result. The use of trim structures in covers, looped filaments in the formation of fabric structures is well known and to use such well known structures in the same well known intended purpose would have been obvious and well within the level of ordinary skill in the art and a reasonably predictable result. The method would have been obvious in view of the structures.
In response to applicant’s remarks, note the following., The First Office action pointed to pgs 0072 and 0073 which states “[0072] In one embodiment ventilation layer 140 is encapsulated by sealing the edges by sewing or heat sealing (FIGS. 5A, 5B, 6A, 6B) and by fusing the fibers at the base of the pad by repeated cycles of heat application. The outer portion of the seat pad is covered with an air-permeable seat trim material such as an inherently air-permeable fabric or an impermeable material such as leather that has holes or slits 200 therein for allowing air passage (FIGS. 17A, 18A, 18C, 18D). The holes or slits may be situated so as to coincide with the likely areas of contact between the seat occupant's body and the trim material. As with the plastic sheeting embodiment discussed above, in this embodiment there are also a limited number of openings in the sealed compartment, generally in the base, which allow air to be brought in, while air exits through the air-permeable seat cover.
[0073] After leaving the hole(s) in the plastic sheeting or other encapsulating material, the ventilation air moves through an optional, air-permeable heating layer 290 and through seat trim layer 210. Seat trim layer 210 may be inherently air-permeable material, such as cloth, or may be a relatively impermeable material such as leather that has been made permeable by creating holes or slits in the material. Air-permeable heating layer is preferably disposed between ventilation layer 140 and seat trim layer 210. The heating material can be of conventional construction, such as resistance wire, carbon fiber, or conductive inks or polymers as is suitable. The attachment of the heater to the fiber pad can be achieved in conventional means such as double-sided adhesive, or by other suitable means known in the art.”
The claim language in claim 1 does not claim an interconnection of the structures that are not taught by the prior art applied. For example, “the fluid impermeable layer comprising an inlet and an outlet can be met by at least two openings.
The office action has pointed out sections in the prior art used in which one can remark or amend when reviewing the prior art in whole.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 24 JUL 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. See remarks above.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSE V CHEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6865. The examiner can normally be reached m-f, m-w 5:30-3:00, th5:30-2:00.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Daniel Troy can be reached at 571 270 3742. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JOSE V CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637
Prosecution Insights